For 2257 the model MUST have 2 ids?
 

Or is the picture of her holding just one ok ?

2 government issued ID's.

hmmm a few clips the company i bought content from claims its 2257 compliant yet the model only holds 1 ID

unless its been changed only 1 is required but 2 is ideal.

then a few companies have lied to you :winkwink:

cool :) thanks

And then there are those of us who have been paying attention.....

1 is required, 2 is against the rules and currently under legal debate.

Don't listen to him. He's wrong.

See this is the problem with the law as it is. Just no one knows. Is there an article or anything about the legality of asking for 2 ids Aaron?

On Thu Mar 08 07:41:11 PST 2007

To All Our Valued Photographers,

We have revised our forms to be used in association with all our future
shoots.

Attached is our current 2257 Compliance Form, Model Release,
Photographer Agreement and Model Bio. Please take a moment to print
these out and review them prior to any scheduled shoots in case you have
any questions.

The main difference on the 2257 form is that we are now requiring only
one form of identification. Our lawyer has advised us that only one
Government Issued Id is required and that including more than one ID in
2257 records may actually violate the provision which requires that all
other non-required records be kept separate from 2257 records §75.2(e).
In addition, asking for a second ID may result in inconsistencies
between the two IDs. Please keep in mind that a clear, good-quality
photocopy of the ID must be attached to the form and the photocopy must
be signed in ink by the Model (If the ID does not contain a recent and
recognizable picture of the Model, only a Driver's License, State ID
Card or Military ID will be acceptable for U.S. Models and only a
passport will be acceptable for foreign Models).

Also, please make a mental note to check if the Models have filled in
their Maiden name on the 2257 form if applicable as a good percentage of
these Models have been or are married.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns with these new
forms.

_________________________________________

On Thu Mar 08 09:08:59 PST 2007

I've been wondering when somebody was going to do their 2257 this
way. The secondary piece of I.D. has never been required and maintaining the two I.D.'s together has been frowned on since day
one. You are the first clients I have had do this. It's nice to
see somebody who is trying to pay attention to the law for once.
:)

Aaron

________________________________________

On Thu Mar 08 09:22:06 PST 2007

We have been wondering if anyone else is using it. You are right, the
second ID was just adopted by the Adult Industry for some reason. I
never knew until our lawyer pointed it out when I questioned him on the
new forms, but apparently you did. hehe And you know more about 2257
than most so it is nice to know that we are covering each other's asses
here. Have a good one and see you in Phoenix I hope.

amazing aint it.

I'm sure there are several resources for that. That's why some of us have attorneys.

I used to think so. These days I hardly pay any attention to 2257 threads. I got sick of beating my head against the wall trying to help these people.

Fuck em. :321GFY

Been in the business for at least 3 years and still doesn't know what is required by 2257.

This industry is FUCKED if they ever decide to check on the small guys.

Truly amazing how stupid some people are.

Hey, let's take a chance with our freedom, let's take legal advice from GFY!

Grab a clue at 7/11.

PS: Aaron, don't bother trying to educate them, "experts" like bossku69 have spoken...

I know man.....I know.


Are you and Treasure going to make it to Phoenix?

Wish we were, unfortunately it wasn't in the cards this time around. I think the next show we'll be attending is Toronto, then the slew of Florida shows...

Bada bing bada boom.

THIS JUST IN!

New law just passed!

Models need 473 pieces of gov't issued ID, all valid, all with photos.

I have one. We've just always got 2 when we shoot a girl, but only send one to the client. That was just to protect our own asses since everyone said to do it. I think the reason people started pushing that was the risk of fake id is less if you ask for 2.

You have a lawyer, but you're listening to "everyone" ?

Thanks Aron, I just came here to double check since my content provider is a well known reliable one...

So when I shoot I will keep it to 1 ID in the pic of the model. (I hope I got it right)

Ihave a meeting with an industry lawyer on monday so hopefully he will clear everything up for me....


Once again.. thanks for the help

Hire a Canadian lawyer too to make sure you aren't breaking Canadian laws. You'd be surprised how many overlap. You have to decide which is the bigger evil.

Well mine is canadian...but he knows the online shit... or so people say...

if u know a good one around MTL let me know... having to sleaze bags is better then one

We do what is required. In fact we go beyond that and do pre interviews with the girls on video, we video tape them signing the releases and ask them on video if the id they presented us with is correct etc. That video and all the forms go on a dvd that is marked with the shoot number that goes on the customer invoice. So what happens if they decide to change it to 2 ids?

Our council is in Toronto, but definitely knows a lot more then the average in the industry. gardiner-roberts.com.

They only need one ID to verify the model during a 2257 records check, so that's all they require.

Any documentation beyond that is for your own standards of security.

The FBI agent had said you won't get into trouble for having too much documentation. There are of course those who say it's a conspiracy and the DoJ will prosecute for having one extra piece of paper.

Talked to my lawyer. He advised me that 2 would not be a problem.

From the electronic Code of Federal Regulations as provided by gpoaccess.gov, with emphasis added:

+++++
§ 75.2 Maintenance of records.
(a) Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, or other matter that contains a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct that is produced in whole or in part with materials that have been mailed or shipped in interstate or foreign commerce, or is shipped or transported or is intended for shipment or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce and that contains one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct made after July 3, 1995 shall, for each performer portrayed in such visual depiction, create and maintain records containing the following:

(1) The legal name and date of birth of each performer, obtained by the producer's examination of a picture identification card. For any performer portrayed in such a depiction made after July 3, 1995, the records shall also include a legible copy of the identification document examined and, if that document does not contain a recent and recognizable picture of the performer, a legible copy of a picture identification card....
++++

This information is "current"..... but the regulations are due for a change, following the passage of the Adam Walsh Act last July.

Actually, they literally are overdue for a change - the Attorney General was supposed to have issued new regulations for review/public comment in January.

The AG is also supposed to issue regulations regarding the new section 2257A this month... I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen in the next 10 days, either.

- Q.

Law is simple..

1 Government issued picture ID
a- passport
b- drivers license
c- military ID
d- state Identification card

2- you are to INSPECT a 2nd ID

You need keep on 1 file only 1 id.

Who is your lawyer?

I read the regulations about a year ago, and it was pretty clear to me that 1 is required, 2 are not only against the rules, but pretty much illegal. Go figure!

It is amazing how many different views can come from one small topic!

2257 has not been litigated, so no judge has interpreted the law, leaving lawyers and pseudo-lawyers to guess how the law may or may not be interpreted!

Here is one section that pertains to this topic:

§ 75.2 Maintenance of records.

(a) Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, or other matter ....that contains one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct made after July 3, 1995 shall, for each performer portrayed in such visual depiction, create and maintain records containing the following:

(1) The legal name and date of birth of each performer, obtained by the producer's examination of a picture identification card. For any performer portrayed in such a depiction made after July 3, 1995, the records shall also include a legible copy of the identification document examined and, if that document does not contain a recent and recognizable picture of the performer, a legible copy of a picture identification card.





What hangs people up, lawyers and well-intentioned GFY'ers, are the words "A" and "THE" when referring to a photo ID. Some want to interpret this SO LITERALLY that they believe it means there must be ONE, and ONLY ONE, picture identification card.

Believing that one and only one ID may be kept in 2257 records is nonsense. The regulation section I included above even refers to a second form of ID if the first does not have a recent picture.

One government issued ID is required. Getting 2 is just covering your ass and there is nothing wrong with keeping copies of 2 ID's in your records. I am so 150% certain that I am right on this that I make this guarantee--

I will provide full legal defense, or pay the attorney of your choice, for anyone who is indicted solely for having 2 model ID's in their records instead of 1.
I am that sure it will never happen.



The easiest way to get a fake ID to drink in a bar is to get an older brother or sister's ID. Bouncers know this, so when they have someone that looks young a good bouncer will ask for another form of ID--like a credit card. The older sibling might give up the driver's license for a night but rarely would give Junior a second ID or credit card to boot. The easiest way to get a fake ID to make some money getting naked is to get an older sibling's ID. If you deal with young models, demand to see at least 2 forms of ID. You will not get in trouble for asking for 2 forms of ID. You will get in trouble for shooting an underage model. I would think producers are at least as smart as the guys holding the door at nightclubs.

Even if you wanted to go with that interpretation, nobody is saying you have to keep the second ID with your primary 2257 records. Put it somewhere else.

The rule to date has always been one form of photo ID, with the recent specification that it be a government issued ID such as a Drivers License, Passport, etc.

I was told the industry has been asking for a second form of ID (Social Security card, etc), in order to double check the name on the ID.

A good practice is to have the first photo and the first frame of video be of the model/performer holding the ID next to their face (with video, zoom in on the ID so that you can see the ID number and face clearly - I usually ask the performer if that is really them in the photo, and if they are over 18 as well).

An equally important issue, perhaps more important (since its hard to imagine the government getting too upset about an extra ID), is that I have seen many photographers include the 2257 info on their model release.

As I understand it, these should be two seperate documents. The 2257 should have only the info required by 2257, and should be stored away from any other documents (model releases, AIM test results, etc).

ADG Webmaster

I would trust AaronM's word over everyone else in this thread.... :2 cents:

Very similar to what we do ADG.

that's why you are my lawyer - a voice of reason :winkwink:

and i hope the sightseeing trip is still on :)

BINGO! :thumbsup

This is a very good point - although I should hope lawyers are making an argument as to what the interpretation should be, as opposed to guessing what it might be.... right?

Otherwise, what do we pay you guys for? :winkwink:

I'm kidding, of course - but I do hope that it's not the case that 'my guess is as good as yours' with regards to existing statutory definitions, and how such might be applied to the same terms within the context of 2257 and the related CFRs.

- Q.